Probably the weakest area but there's still Walker/Tomori/Colwill/ChilwellBack four not so strong.
And even Maguire has shown recently that he's not as bad as the slatings he gets
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Probably the weakest area but there's still Walker/Tomori/Colwill/ChilwellBack four not so strong.
I dunno just having a guess, very sorryWhat difference would it make now? Doesn’t make any sense it’s not like we can balance the books after the fact.
And he'd barely play for Arsenal before the summer tooWith our financial situation, Onana is certainly going to be required as a 'book balancer' before too long. Hopefully that won't be necessary until the summer at the earliest. Losing Onana this window will significantly weaken us, unless we replace him but that would be very difficult in January with our limited money.
Expect at goodison and I’ve seen him in a few big games this season and he’s hardly been noticedNot having Onana going for 60mil if Caicedo goes for 110mil
Some of Caicedo's performances this season would have people here doing somersaults if he were our player
He and Dendoncker another Belgium international both getting games for top 4 villa. Untill Bellingham turned up England basically had Henderson, Philips and rice for the last 5yrs, so I’m not sure where this greater depth comes from you’re taking about. Rice is the only one who would get a look in with BelgiumKdB is not the answer to which nation has greater depth. That's the opposite of depth, he's the first name on the teamsheet. The fact is Garner has more players in front of him for England than Onana has for Belgium. Henderson getting games is because Southgate is weirdly loyal and everybody knows he shouldn't be in the squad. Tielemans rarely even starts for Villa.
I really don't know what you're laughing at tbh, England clearly has far greater depth than Belgium
I still think 60mil is too low for Onana but a Garner/Onana debate through the lens of international teams is meaningless
Yeah, this was my thoughtWouldn't be surprised if clubs are gonna make offers based on assuming we have a perilous financial situation
This is now a fairly standard fee in fairness. Any striker that's good enough for Arsenal is nearing £100m these days, don't think them spending on Onana would make a difference one way or the other really. If they going to be without Partey due to "injury" for a while then spending on Onana is wise. It's Richarlison all over again really, very expensive on paper for what he actually returns but is probably £10m cheaper than he would be at another club simply because of the state Everton are in.You'd think Arsenal should be spending this type of money on a striker, right?
Nah mate, not having a go, just sounds strange on the face of it. However, knowing this club it probably makes sense.I dunno just having a guess, very sorry
If its for the FFP/ P&S it's way too late , they were submitted by 31st December.We'd 100% need a replacement. Money can't just go into the ffp trust fund.
If we could somehow convince Kalvin Phillips that a loan move to us is better than Newcastle then I'd take that swap til summer if it protected us from having to sell Branthwaite or Pickford. The assumption has always been that someone has to go this window to keep the banks from the doorWe'd 100% need a replacement. Money can't just go into the ffp trust fund.